Arxiv:2008.00082V3 [Physics.Atom-Ph] 12 Oct 2020
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Sensitive magnetometry in challenging environments Kai-Mei C. Fu,1 Geoffrey Z. Iwata,2, 3 Arne Wickenbrock,2, 3 and Dmitry Budker2, 3, 4 1University of Washington, Physics Department and Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, Seattle, WA, 98105, USA 2Helmholtz-Institut, GSI Helmholtzzentrum f¨ur Schwerionenforschung, 55128 Mainz, Germany 3Johannes Gutenberg-Universit¨atMainz, 55128 Mainz, Germany 4Department of Physics, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-7300, USA (Dated: October 13, 2020) State-of-the-art magnetic field measurements performed in shielded environments with carefully controlled conditions rarely reflect the realities of those applications envisioned in the introductions of peer-reviewed publications. Nevertheless, significant advances in magnetometer sensitivity have been accompanied by serious attempts to bring these magnetometers into the challenging working environments in which they are often required. This review discusses the ways in which various (predominantly optically-pumped) magnetometer technologies have been adapted for use in a wide range of noisy and physically demanding environments. I. INTRODUCTION of the sensor with the environment itself - it would be a difficult task indeed to convince a doctor to place a hot rubidium or cesium vapor cell inside a patient's body, no Magnetic fields are routinely measured with high sen- matter how well protected. sitivity to probe the physical processes that underlie a Unsurprisingly, utilization of enhanced measurement vast array of natural phenomena. From geological move- techniques and noise mitigation is an integral part of ments, solar flares, and atmospheric discharge, to inter- magnetometer development across many applications, cellular processes, neuronal communication in the brain, and is well documented across the literature. Notwith- molecular scale chemical processes, and sub-atomic in- standing, recent advances in sensors motivate new crite- teractions; magnetic fields are produced and can convey ria for evaluating the best match between sensor and ap- detailed information about both the dynamic and static plication, and the techniques to optimize measurements. properties of these systems. While no single magnetometer type is suited for all sens- While the ubiquity and high information density of ing challenges, the diversity in available magnetometer these fields make them attractive to measure, many of technologies can cover the envisioned plethora of envi- the field sources to be studied exist in environments ronments. that are hostile to the state-of-the-art precision mag- Here, we describe how optically pumped magnetome- netometry techniques developed over the last 60 years.p ters (OPMs) based on hot atomic vapors as well as neg- Magnetometers with sensitivities better than 10 pT= Hz atively charged nitrogen-vacancy (NV−) defects in dia- must contend with measuring signals in environments mond are particularly well suited for these challenges, with formidable magnetic noise and dramatic gradients. and the strategies that have been developed to adapt Whether in a laboratory, hospital, airport, moving car, these sensors to the broad range of measurement condi- helicopter or spacecraft, the background environmental tions. noise must be understood and surmounted. Neurons fir- ing in the brain have an associated magnetic field sig- nal on the scalp surface lasting a couple ms with a few II. OPTICALLY-PUMPED MAGNETOMETERS hundred fT amplitude (i.e., only parts per billion of the Earth field), meaning movement within even a 1 nT/cm There is a large variety in the ways to measure mag- gradient would swamp the monitored brain signal. netic fields in extreme environments. In this review, we Beyond these difficulties of signal-to-noise, magne- discuss mainly (but not exclusively) two types of devices tometers may also be required to perform under phys- that belong to the same broad class of optically pumped arXiv:2008.00082v3 [physics.atom-ph] 12 Oct 2020 ical conditions which at first glance may seem incom- magnetometers (OPM): magnetometers based on glass patible with their operating principles. High- and low- cells filled with vapors of alkali atoms and magnetometers pressure and temperature environments affect the per- utilizing color-center defects in solids and more specifi- formance of almost any magnetometer. High levels of cally, the workhorse of the field, nitrogen-vacancy (NV) radiation, whether in space, at particle accelerators or centers in diamond. Both magnetometer types imple- at nuclear reactors, could disrupt the sensitive quantum ment precise measurements of the response of the re- states prepared in magnetometers, or compromise sensor spective spin system to magnetic fields, to infer the local infrastructure and electronics. Vibrations can make cer- magnetic field. Both magnetometer types can be initial- tain measurements impossible, while a rapidly changing ized (\pumped") to a specific spin state, controlled and field may be far beyond a sensor's bandwidth and dy- read out with laser light (see Fig. 1). Both types of de- namic range. We must also consider the compatibility vices have received growing attention in recent years and 2 FIG. 1. Optical magnetometry with vapor cells (a-d) and with NV centers (e-h) emphasising the similarities. (a) An example of a glass vapor cell used for magnetometry. It is two centimeters in diameter, has a reservoir for Rb and a stem to separate the sensing volume and the reservoir. The inner walls of the cell are coated with an alkene film [1] enabling coherence times of up to 77 s. (b) Basic working principle (admitting numerous variations). Individual Rb atoms flying with thermal velocities ballistically through the cell are subject to pump laser light to polarize the magnetic moments, a magnetic field B0, an oscil- lating magnetic B1-field to probe the magnetic resonance and an additional probe laser field to read out the spin-precession non-destructively via optical rotation of its polarization. (c) The Rb magnetic-sublevel manifolds of the F = 1 ground and excited states. Optical pumping with a circular polarized on-resonant D1-line laser light at 795 nm transfers the atoms into the mF = +1 sublevel (quantization axis along B0). If the oscillating B1-field corresponds to the energy difference between Zeeman sublevels, there is a coherent transverse component of the magnetization that manifests itself as polarization oscillation at the Larmor frequency !L in the far detuned linear polarized probe beam. (d) The corresponding magnetic resonance appears after demodulating this oscillating signal with a lock-in amplifier (LIA). Its center frequency is, to first approximation, proportional to the magnetic field. This magnetic-field measurement scheme is referred to as Mz magnetometry [2]. (e) A selection of diamond samples having been exposed to different doses of electron irradiation but not yet annealed. Irradia- tion and annealing are steps in producing samples with different color-center densities. Room-temperature coherence times can be milliseconds. (f) Basic working principle (admitting numerous variations). NV centers are embedded in a diamond matrix and conventionally subjected to green 532 nm light for polarization, a magnetic field B0, and an oscillating magnetic B1-field to probe the magnetic resonance. The measured signal from the NV centers is either spin-state dependent red photoluminescence (PL) or infrared absorption (not shown). (g) The relevant energy levels of the NV centers: the magnetic triplet ground and 3 3 excited states ( A2 and E, respectively) separated by an energy corresponding to the 637 nm zero-phonon line and the two 1 1 singlet levels E and A1. The grey gradients above the energy levels indicate broadening due to phonons. A green 532 nm 3 3 laser is often used to excite the A2 ! E transitions. Even though the excitation and subsequent PL are spin-conserving, the intersystem crossing (ISC) to the singlet states is not. The rates are higher for the mS = ±1 excited-state sublevels, which leads to accumulation of NV population in the mS = 0 sublevel. Magnetic resonances can be observed as a reduction of photoluminescence when the frequency of the oscillating magnetic field B1 matches the energy difference between magnetic sublevels. On resonance, population is transferred from the mS = 0 into one of the mS = ±1 sublevels. The mS = ±1 states have a higher energy due to spin-spin interactions. (h) The two spin transitions can be observed around a central frequency of D ≈ 2870 MHz, with the difference of the two center frequencies determined by the magnetic field. Important quantities are the contrast C and the width of the resonance as a measure for the coherence time of the NV center (ensemble). 3 are being applied for measurements in various challeng- (b) 1.00 (c) 10 1.00 ing environments due to their unique properties. 8 0.99 1 6 11 Vapor-cell magnetometry,p with ap demonstrated sensi- 9 2 10 −18 0.99 3 9 tivity of ≈ 160 aT= Hz (10 T= Hz) by M. Romalis' 0.98 4 8 group at Princeton [3], is comparable to state-of-the-art 5 7 PL [norm.] 1 7 PL [norm.] 0.98 SQUID systems (superconducting quantum interference 0.97 3 5 devices) which require cryogenics [4, 5]. The sensitiv- 0.96 2 4 6 ity of vapor-cell magnetometers improves with size; for 0.96450 500 45 50 55 60 65 95 100 105 110 a given density the more atoms one can probe the bet- B-Field [mT] B-Field [mT] ter. This scaling is advantageous for spatially extended (a) 1.10 field measurements with the trade-off of limited spatial 1.08 resolution. These sensors usually incorporate glass cells 1.06 filled with gas, which are macroscopic objects with di- mensions typically between 0.2 and 10 cm (Fig. 9c) and 1.04 are not well suited for probing magnetic structures below 1.02 these dimensions. 1.00 NV-NV NV-center magnetometers are typically less sensitive 0.98 Contrast 4.5% than vapor cells, although continuously improving [6].